Itt: badly describe any book on philosophy and others try to guess it

It's Ethics and Plato, but especially the Republic

Use the force

>Dude you see a side of a cube and fill in the rest lmao"

Kant?

Mine:

"Man, we're super duper free and shit. So we should kill ourselves. But you first"

Dude beetles lmao

HARD MODE:

The truth is the search for the journey. You're a miserable fuck because you're not patient enough. Stop being such a self-deceiving faggot.

>"Man, we're super duper free and shit. So we should kill ourselves. But you first"

Hmm.. Sartre?

the world just does things and then states happen, but some things those states do are bad

My property is a spook

>"Man, we're super duper free and shit. So we should kill ourselves. But you first"
Albert Came-us?

man catastrophically destroys the thing he is trying to protect

A fox enters the chicken coop and leaves hungry.

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

>kid

Descartes, Kierkegaard?

Schopenhauer?

>I finally got what I wanted - but I'm more unhappy now that I have it, than I was in trying to get it

The common man is right, but in a way he'd never be able to understand.

If you value anything more than yourself, you're a deluded motherfucker.

Schopenhauer. Endless striving/willing/etc.

Kant (you borrowed a Nietzsche quotation).

Stirner.

Kierkegaard.

If it's not Schopenhauer, it sounds like him.

Wittgenstein.

The hard mode one is not Schopenhauer.

refer to the same work though the first one applies to a surprising number of books/philosophers.

the problem of the fox is that he cannot bring his project to its logical conclusion

my diary

Meditations? Or maybe Montaigne
Philosophical Investigations
Being and Time?
>memes

Hard mode is not Montaigne or Aurelius. Philosophical Investigations is correct though.

Actually, isn't Kant, but you're not far off (not chronologically, but inspiration wise).

Here's some hard mode ones (not really obscure, but not that often mentioned around here philosophers edition):

1. "Dude what if we're all in the Matrix, but because we chose it and you can totally be traumatized by it and choose not to respawn after you die?"

2. "What if you touch yourself but can't feel both touching and being touched and you can touch several things at once and focus on one thing at a time only and if you can't do that your body goes batshit flailing and stuff?"

3. "What if being is made out of time and stuff, but stuff is also time only slower or some shit?"

4. "What if the mind is made out of machines and factories and stuff?"

5. "What if you really have to stare a capped nigga in the face to truly be ethical or something?"

Just to clarify: Kant was a big influence for the mystery philosopher, not the other way around.

Forgot to mention, it's not Wittgenstein either.

The Greeks!

Online stream of aphorisms in majuscule script.

You can either stay #woke or not
But if you ain't #woke senpai, at least be sleepin comfy like I say

How can morals be real if our Christian God isn't real?

I'm such a sperg that I left my gf andnow I have to justify it

Kierkegaard - Either/Or

Don't procreate.

dude like i was totally born in the wrong generation lmao

How to be a wingman: tell the person your friend is into that they don't know shit and cannot know nuffin about relationships even if they did.

either kinda work, I was thinking Sartre

I know that i don't know but actually i'm acting high and mighty and i think to know more than anyone else

My Twisted World.

Wisdom Of Life

#4 sounds like it might be hobbes

"You china figure out what she sayin but she just playing games senpai"

too easy. you should have said:

All I know is that I know how to be condescending. Also, have a bullshit techne analogy.

To Do List:
1. Fold cloak in half
2. Make Plato feel like an idiot
3. Masturbate in public

Better Never To Have Been, obviously

Diogenes

Diogeneeeeeeees!

REI???

It is what it is
It all fits in these boxes
Shut up, you, what do you know

...

jeez I'd like to know what all these are from

Russell or Frege?

Haha, yep

>4. "What if the mind is made out of machines and factories and stuff?"
Man a Machine?

Guy points out that Jews poisoned the well of western civilization but didn't hold it against them.

dude its ok to use terror and violence in politics, because u know, pretty much everything is violence, so u know, ur just defending against bigger violence

Genealogy of Morals

Apology of Socrates

Ligotti's entire oeuvre

Dude, you know what is better than the idea of a blowjob? a REAL blowjob.
Therefore god exists.

Dude, what if morals was lingo but we only knew the vocab lmao?

>this kid

Are you deaf?

That's an unattractive woman in her late 20s

Based Marx???

You probably mean Summa but the argument itself actually came from Proslogion

Leviathan

diaf

probably s/he meant neither

It's not Hobbes, but now that you mention it maybe he had some similar ideas.

No, but materialism is kinda the right direction.

I won't spoil it yet, but I'll post the answers later if nobody gets them.

No, it's Anti-Oedipus.

'Cause that's just the way it is...

Bingo!

...

Am I wrong???

Really vague, is it Epicurus or some Stoic, or are you going for Psychoanalysis (Lacan, Freud) ?

Genealogy of morals?

This one sounds really vague. Maybe some fatalist / hard determinist?

It sounds like it could be Hobbes or Machiavelli, but Marx justified some similar stuff as well as far as I know.

Husserl? Sounds like phenomenology.

Then again, I am an idiot, so probably wrong.

but camus said not to kill yourself to conquer the absurdism of life or something like that. correct me if i´m wrong, haven´t read sisyphos in a while

dude i can hear the fatness of this person through the slurping of his cheeks

Slavoj.

Yep, it was Husserl. Although the cube thing is one if his famous examples, it probably shows up in quite a few philosophers.

>Genealogy of morals?

no but it's discussed here

Not who I was thinking of, but you're close with Russell

> china

Searle?

3 heidegger being and time??

I know God is a stupid idea but muh feels so let's sodomize probability theory because uncertainty and infinite gain, honest.

Kirk en guarde

>*grinds lens Jewishly*

youtube.com/watch?v=7GpT6ycHoMA

2-3 are definitely Being and Time.

1 is probably Baudrillard.

Is number one seriously Buddha?

Pascal.

When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that
is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies)
we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem.
This tendency is pronounced among minority rights activists,
whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend.
The terms “negro”, “oriental”, “handicapped” or “chick” for an African,
an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation.
“Broad” and “chick” were merely the feminine equivalents of “guy”, “dude” or “fellow”.
The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves.
Those who are most sensitive about
“politically incorrect” terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller,
Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists,
many of whom do not even belong to any
“oppressed” group but come from privileged strata of society.
Political correctness has its stronghold among university students.
Many leftists have an intense identification
with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women),
defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals) or otherwise inferior.

The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior.
They would never admit to themselves that they have such feelings,
but it is precisely because they do see these groups as
inferior that they identify with their problems.
(We do not mean to suggest that women, Indians, etc.
ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology.)
Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong and as capable as men.
Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.
Modern leftish philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science,
objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative.
The leftist’s feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification
of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior.
This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of
mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests.
Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principles,
and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type.
But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism.
Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power.
Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be
of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help.

2 is not Heidegger, but you're very close.
3 is also not Heidegger, but 3 had an influence on 2 so it's sort of close.

1 is not Baudrillard. The metaphysical aspect is kinda literal, not just simulacra.

Hopefully the hints didn't make it too easy.